Retirement Client Acquisition Engine Economics
Model the complete journey from retirement enquiry to comprehensive advice client — including acquisition costs, revenue, ROI and enterprise value.
Illustrative modelling only. Actual outcomes depend on advertising performance, qualification, adviser capacity, conversion, fees and client retention.
Fixed and variable acquisition inputs
Attendance and conversion rates
Revenue and enterprise value assumptions
Optional dedicated appointment-setting capacity
Cost per stage
Live volume and unit economics across the funnel
Investment & blended CAC
Fully loaded acquisition economics
Comprehensive advice clients are being acquired below the $3,000 blended acquisition target, including all enabled costs.
Revenue & ROI
Year-one and lifetime return on the acquisition system
Annualised impact & enterprise value
Indicative annual outcomes and enterprise value uplift
This is an illustrative revenue-multiple model, not a formal business valuation.
Funnel visualisation
How volume flows from ad spend to comprehensive advice clients
Cost per outcome
Advertising cost at each funnel stage vs. blended cost per client
Economies of scale
How fixed costs dilute across greater productive volume
As advertising volume increases, the fixed management fee is spread across more clients. Appointment-setting costs increase only when meeting volume exceeds the available capacity of the current team.
| Ad spend | Opt-ins | Clarity calls | Adviser meetings | Setters | Utilisation | Clients | Total investment | Ad-only CAC | Blended CAC | Y1 revenue | Y1 ROI | LTV ROI | Enterprise value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| $3,000 | 120 | 30 | 9.9 | — | — | 2 | $11,000 | $1,515 | $5,556 | $15,840 | 44% | 440% | $570,240 |
| $6,000 | 240 | 60 | 19.8 | — | — | 4 | $14,000 | $1,515 | $3,535 | $31,680 | 126% | 749% | $1,140,480 |
| $9,000 | 360 | 90 | 29.7 | — | — | 5.9 | $17,000 | $1,515 | $2,862 | $47,520 | 180% | 948% | $1,710,720 |
| $15,000 | 600 | 150 | 49.5 | — | — | 9.9 | $23,000 | $1,515 | $2,323 | $79,200 | 244% | 1191% | $2,851,200 |
| $25,000 | 1,000 | 250 | 82.5 | — | — | 16.5 | $33,000 | $1,515 | $2,000 | $132,000 | 300% | 1400% | $4,752,000 |
| $40,000 | 1,600 | 400 | 132 | — | — | 26.4 | $48,000 | $1,515 | $1,818 | $211,200 | 340% | 1550% | $7,603,200 |
| $60,000 | 2,400 | 600 | 198 | — | — | 39.6 | $68,000 | $1,515 | $1,717 | $316,800 | 366% | 1647% | $11,404,800 |
| $80,000 | 3,200 | 800 | 264 | — | — | 52.8 | $88,000 | $1,515 | $1,667 | $422,400 | 380% | 1700% | $15,206,400 |
| $100,000 | 4,000 | 1,000 | 330 | — | — | 66 | $108,000 | $1,515 | $1,636 | $528,000 | 389% | 1733% | $19,008,000 |
Where should this firm optimise first?
Modelled impact of the highest-leverage improvements